United States v. Kahriger
|United States v. Kahriger|
|Argued December 16–17, 1952
Decided March 9, 1953
|Full case name||United States v. Kahriger|
|Citations||345 U.S. 22 (more)
73 S. Ct. 510; 97 L. Ed. 754; 1953 U.S. LEXIS 2699; 53-1 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) P9245; 43 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 93; 1953-1 C.B. 456
|Prior history||Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania|
|The federal occupational tax on persons engaged in the business of accepting wagers under the 1951 Revenue Act was constitutional.|
|Majority||Reed, joined by Vinson, Burton, Clark, Minton|
|Dissent||Black, joined by Douglas|
|Dissent||Frankfurter, joined by Douglas, in part|
|U.S. Const. art. I, §8, clause 1; U.S. Const. amend. X; Revenue Act of 1951|
|Marchetti v. United States, 390 U.S. 39 (1968)|
United States v. Kahriger, 345 U.S. 22 (1953), was a United States Supreme Court ruling that held certain provisions of the Revenue Act of 1951 were constitutional, in particular sections related to an occupational tax on persons involved in gambling.
The Supreme Court ruled that the Congressional purpose of penalizing intrastate gambling under the guise of imposing a tax did not violate the Constitution by infringing the police power reserved to the states. The Court stated: "Unless there are [penalty] provisions extraneous to any tax need, courts are without authority to limit the exercise of the taxing power."
The Supreme Court also ruled that the 1951 Revenue Act did not violate the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. However, this holding was later overruled by the Court in Marchetti v. United States, 390 U.S. 39 (1968).
- Gerald Gunther, Constitutional Law, p. 198-199, Foundation Press, Inc. (11th Ed. 1985).
- Gerald Gunther, Constitutional Law, p. 198, Foundation Press, Inc. (11th Ed. 1985).
- Callison, James W. (1953), "Congressional Powers: Validity of the 1951 Gamblers' Occupational Tax Act", Michigan Law Review 52 (1): 150–152, doi:10.2307/1285372.
- Coons, John E. (1953), "The Federal Gambling Tax and the Constitution", Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science 43 (5): 637–642, doi:10.2307/113964.
|This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.|